Hardeep Singh vs State Of Punjab
2026 Latest Caselaw 3975 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Hardeep Singh vs State Of Punjab on 29 April, 2026

           CRM-M-21477--2026 (O&M)                           1




                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                           CHANDIGARH
           (205)                                        CRM-M-21477-2026 (O&M)
                                                                                  2026
                                                         Date of decision : 29.04.2026

           HARDEEP SINGH
                                                                                          ...
                                                                                           .. Petitioner

                                                           Versus
           STATE OF PUNJAB

                                                                                        ...Respondent

           CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA
           Present:                 Mr. Sukhdeep Singh Khaira, Advocate for the petitioner

                                    Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab

                                    ***

           MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL)

1. The instant one is the third petition filed by the petitioner under

Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNSS")

for grant of interim anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No.167 dated

15.07.2025 registered under Section 15 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic

Substances Act (for short "NDPS Act") (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added

later on) at Police Station Lehra, District Sangrur. The previous petitions as

filed by him seeking pre-arrest pre arrest bail have been dismissed as withdrawn.

2. The aforementioned FIR was regist registered ered on the allegations that on

15.07.2025, on receipt of a secret information to the effect that the present

petitioner was involved in sale of intoxicant tablets and on that very day also he

was present near Tibbian Wala fields for selling intoxicant tab tablets, lets, while being

accompanied with some other person, a raiding party was formed which reached

integrity of this order/judgment.

at the informed place and found two persons sitting in a car. When the vehicle

was tried to be stopped, both the occupants managed to flee by taking advantage

off darkness by rushing towards the nearby paddy crop fields. On checking the

vehicle, 72 Kgs of poppy husk was recovered from the boot of the car which

was taken into possession.

3. As per the further allegations, during the course of investigation, it

wass revealed that the above-mentioned car was owned by one Munish Kumar,

who was joined into investigation and who disclosed that he had sold the said

car which was recovered from the spot to the present petitioner for a sum of

Rs.2,40,000/-.. He also showed WhatsApp chat betw between een the petitioner and

himself made in this context. The petitioner was nominated as accused.

Apprehending his arrest, he moved applications before the Sessions Court and

then before this Court but he did not get any relief. Warrant of arrest issued

against inst him. Proclamation proceedings have been initiated against him and the

same was ordered to be issued for 04.04.2026.

4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he had

suffered a road accident on 07.03.2026 and has sustained serious ch chest est and

abdominal trauma/injuries.

trauma . He has remained admitted in hospital and his is

condition is critical. The findings given by the doctors are of suggestive of

bowel perforation due to intestinal rupture and chest injury. He has got a major

abdominal surgery. He requires further medical care and for that purpose, he

deserves to be extended benefit of interim pre-arrest pre arrest bail. There is a substantial

change in thee circumstances from the date of dismissal of his previous petitions

integrity of this order/judgment.

which could not be foreseen by the petitioner. He is ready and willing to join

the investigation and cooperate with the same as and when he becomes

medically fit. It is, therefore, argued argued that the petition deserves to be allowed and

he deserves to be extended benefit of interim bail.

5. Status report has been filed. Learned State counsel has argued that

there are serious allegations against the petitioner as commercial quantity of

contraband raband had been recovered from the vehicle which was owned and occupied

by the petitioner at the time of recovery. He had managed to flee from the spot.

He evaded his apprehension for long time. Even proclamation proceedings have

been initiated against him. He has not been admitted in any hospital at present.

The medical record produced by him is more than one month old. No

exceptional or extra-ordinary extra ordinary circumstance for grant of interim bail is made out.

There are no substantial changes in the circumstances circumstances from his earlier petitions.

It is, therefore, argued that the petition does not deserve to be allowed.

6. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel

for the parties at considerable length.

7. The previous two petitions as filed by the petitioner for grant of

anticipatory bail had been dismissed as withdrawn. Now, he is making prayer

for grant of interim anticipatory bail on the ground that he had met with a

roadside accident and his condition is critical. Discharge summa summary ry of the

petitioner as issued by the Park Hospital shows that he had admitted in the said

hospital on 11.03.2026, but had left against medical medical advice on the same day day,,

though hough from this record, it has been revealed that the petitioner had undergone a

integrity of this order/judgment.

surgery ry and on account of injuries received by him in a roadside accident. The

petitioner has also produced a copy of prescription issued by Janak Surgery Care

and Ankur Advance Urology Centre showing that he has been advised some

medicines,, however, the same does does not reveal that his condition is still critical or

he is not capable of joining investigation proceedings by appearing before the

Investigating Officer. The allegations against him are serious in nature. Taking

into consideration the fact that no material material has been placed on record showing

his recent medical condition, this Court is of the considered opinion that no

compelling ground has been made out for exercising the powers under Section

482 of BNSS which are required to be exercised in exceptional and extra--

ordinary circumstances. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

8. It is, however, clarified that the the observations made hereinabove

shall not be construed as an expression of opinion opinion on the merits of the case and

shall not influence uence the outcome outcom of the trial.

9. Since the main petition pet has been dismissed dismissed, pending application, if

any, is rendered infructuous.

(MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE 29.04.2026 Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Amit Sharma Whether reportable:- Yes/No

integrity of this order/judgment.